A computer stolen from Hazel Blears’s constituency office has turned out to contain sensitive government information on defence and extremism. As the BBC reports, it isn’t yet clear if this means Hazel Blears broke any rules on the handling of government information, but given the rules against holding such information on personal computers, for example, it is hard to see how the data could have ended up on the computer without someone breaking some rules.
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
Search
Op-eds
-
Observations of an ex pat: Stormy Red Sea (Tom Arms)
-
By-Election Report 01.10.26 (Joe Nutt)
-
Picking our allies, a perspective on Israel/Palestine (Gillian Mosely)
-
Burnham is right to reform the triple lock; the Lib Dems should support it (James Hill)
-
Why I won’t Wayve goodbye to Black Cabs (Christian de Vartavan)
A ghost sign near Parliament Hill Fields
Some of the churches of Gower
Recent Comments
Jack Meredith
@Matt (Bristol( WOW, you literally did call it!...
PM
@ Mick, We agree that the triple lock should be maintained . We disagree that the burden should fall mainly on the younger generation. This is what your " w...
David Allen
Selfish comment: I'm 76, healthy for now, live in a small village, couldn't easily cope without a car. One day, I might become unable to drive. Then, despite ...
Peter Davies
Driverless cars are not just a replacement for Black Cabs which make up a small proportion of the hire market. They will replace minicabs first but expect them ...- Peter Davies
"A 2025 study in Traffic Injury Prevention found Waymo’s San Francisco any-injury crash rate was 0.88 per million miles against a human benchmark of 8.02, an ...
6 Comments
The translation of the “departmental spokesman”‘s remaks is simple. The computer contained “Confidential” and “Restricted” documents which should not have been there.
It also contained some indisceet material that was not classified.
I am unable to offer a translation of what the departmental spokesman carefully did not say.
When she was a Home Office Minister, Hazel Blears chaired a working group on Cyber Trust and Crime Prevention, and wrote a preface for the executive summary which the group produced, so she’s well aware of the issues surrounding computer security.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha talk about hoist by her own petard!
* sits back and waits for Fate to take his revenge on her for schadenfreude *
It’ll all be the fault of a junior/ temporary/ casual/ contract/ illegally-present-in-the-UK member of staff, who has since left the employment/ service/ country/ planet, and no further action would be appropriate.
Mark my words.
While Labour MP’s are doing their best to continue an incompetant run of losing sensitive documents, the Tories have still got their snouts in the trough filching expenses:
Latest Tory sleaze here
“Two Tory MPs, Sir Nicholas Winterton and his wife Ann, were in “unequivocal” breach of Parliamentary rules by claiming over £165,000 in rent on a property which they had bought outright, MPs have concluded.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4164118.ece
If he actually sacked all the sleazebags in his party, Cameron wouldn’t have many MP’s or MEP’s left.
The government’s Protective Marking Scheme classifies sensitive documents in four categories according to the damage that would be done if they were improperly disclosed. The categories are (in decreasing level of sensitivity) Top Secret, Secret, Confidential and Restricted.
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/foi/reading_room/topic/~/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/foi/classifications%20pdf.ashx
Saying that the computer didn’t have any Secret or Top Secret material on it invites us the infer that it had Confidential material on it. What does that mean? Well the definition of “Confidential” is:
“The compromise of this information or material would be likely: materially to damage diplomatic relations (i.e. cause formal protest or other sanction); to prejudice individual security or liberty; to cause damage to the operational effectiveness or security of UK or allied forces or the effectiveness of valuable security or intelligence operations; to work substantially against national finances or economic and commercial interests; substantially to undermine the financial viability of major organisations; to impede the investigation or facilitate the commission of serious crime; to impede seriously the development or operation of major government policies; to shut down or otherwise substantially disrupt significant national operations.”